Spit1a > SpitII

[heloguy]

Originally Posted by Osprey

The pilot was trained for the 109 first, he didn't just get in it. Besides, these are test pilots, not just any pilot. We can only go by the information we have available just as the pilots did in real life in 1940, in this case they are formal tests by RAE. What else are we going to use?

Have you ever heard the term jack-of-all trades, and master of none? I know a lot of aircraft were similar to fly back then, but especially different countries had way different ergonomics and gauges.

As a pilot, I've flown with pilots that are rated on different aircraft that they fly all the time (these test pilots flew 109s at only a certain point in their careers). They are not experts on all types, and tend to make mistakes. These mistakes aren't usually dangerous, but they can potentially cause the aircraft to not fly at its full potential.

All I'm saying is that documents with actual performance numbers should be those that are used for FMs, not comparisons that say Plane A is better than Plane B in this maneuver. There's nothing scientific about that.